Obesity prevention and personal responsibility: the case of front-of-pack food labelling in Australia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Australia, the food industry and public health groups are locked in serious struggle for regulatory influence over the terms of front-of-pack food labelling. Clear, unambiguous labelling of the nutritional content of pre-packaged foods and of standardized food items sold in chain restaurants is consistent with the prevailing philosophy of 'personal responsibility'. An interpretive, front-of-pack labelling scheme has the capacity to encourage healthier patterns of eating, and to be a catalyst for improvements in the nutritional quality of food products through re-formulation. On the other hand, the strength of opposition of the Australian Food and Grocery Council to 'Traffic Light Labelling', and its efforts to promote a non-interpretive, voluntary scheme, invite the interpretation that the food industry is resistant to any reforms that could destabilise current (unhealthy) purchasing patterns and the revenues they represent.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This article argues that although policies that aim to educate consumers about the nutritional content of food are welcome, they are only one part of a broader basket of policies that are needed to make progress on obesity prevention and public health nutrition. However, to the extent that food labelling has the capacity to inform and empower consumers to make healthier choices - and to be a catalyst for improving the nutritional quality of commercial recipes - it has an important role to play. Furthermore, given the dietary impact of meals eaten in fast food and franchise restaurants, interpretive labelling requirements should not be restricted to pre-packaged foods.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Food industry resistance to an interpretive food labelling scheme is an important test for government, and a case study of how self-interest prompts industry to promote weaker, voluntary schemes that pre-empt and undermine progressive public health regulation.</p

The best start: report on the inquiry into the health benefits of breastfeeding

This report presents an introduction to the current state of breastfeeding in Australia, outlining existing programs that are working well but indicating that these would benefit from more support and increased awareness by the community of the importance of breastfeeding. It examines the health benefits of breastfeeding for babies and mothers, and analyses breastfeeding from an economic perspective, discussing the short and long-term impacts on Australia\u27s health system. The report also looks at breastfeeding challenges and the barriers to successful breastfeeding, including conditions such as postnatal postnatal support services in rural and remote areas. It considers infant formula and the impact that marketing of infant formula has on breastfeeding and considers the Marketing in Australian of Infant Formula (MAIF) Agreement, how it is different from the World Health Organisation (WHO) code, and how this is working in Australia

Breastfeeding beyond the big smoke: Who provides support for mothers in rural Western Australia?

Introduction: Despite strong and growing evidence for the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding to 6 months of age, few infants in developed countries reach this milestone. Although breastfeeding practice and its determinants are well described for women in metropolitan areas, there is limited evidence for rural and regional areas of Australia. This paper describes the influence of advice and support on breastfeeding duration for women in rural areas of Western Australia in the first 6 months of their infants' lives. Methods: A cohort of 427 women and their infants were recruited from hospitals in regional Western Australia and followed up for a period of 12 months. Information about feeding methods was gathered in hospital and at a further seven follow-up contacts. Results: Women who had attended antenatal classes were less likely to have ceased exclusively breastfeeding before 6 months than those who had not attended classes (aHR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.41-0.91). No significant associations were found between provision of information alone and duration of breastfeeding. Breastfeeding advice and support in the first 6 months was most commonly sought from Child Health Nurses, General Practitioners and friends. Conclusions: Antenatal group education is effective in supporting breastfeeding duration for rural women and should be a key priority for rural health service providers. Health professionals are common sources of breastfeeding support postnatally, however creating and maintaining positive and supportive social networks for mothers might also contribute to increasing the proportion of rural infants who meet the World Health Organization guidelines for exclusive breastfeeding